+System of Rice Intensification

+System of Rice Intensification

Hunger is not caused by lack of food it is caused by lack of money. No–one with money starves”.

The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) is a methodology aimed at increasing the yield of rice produced in farming. It is a low water, labor-intensive, organic methodthat uses younger seedlings singly spaced and typically hand weeded with special tools. It was developed in 1983 by the FrenchJesuitFatherHenri de Laulanié in Madagascar.[1] However full testing and spread of the system throughout the rice growing regions of the world did not occur until some years later with the help of Universities like Cornell

Contents

History and main ideas of SRI

Assembly of the practices that culminated in SRI began in the 1960s based on Fr. de Laulanie’s observations. Principles included applying a minimum quantity of water and the individual transplanting of very young seedlings in a square pattern.[1]

SRI concepts and practices have continued to evolve as they are being adapted to rain-fed (unirrigated) conditions and with transplanting being superseded by direct-seeding sometimes. The central principles of SRI according to Cornell University, New York are:[2]

Rice field soils should be kept moist rather than continuously saturated, minimizing anaerobic conditions, as this improves root growth and supports the growth and diversity of aerobic soil organisms.

Rice plants should be planted singly and spaced optimally widely to permit more growth of roots and canopy and to keep all leaves photosynthetically active.

Rice seedlings should be transplanted when young, less than 15 days old with just two leaves, quickly, shallow and carefully, to avoid trauma to roots and to minimize transplant shock.

Evaluating SRI

Proponents and critics of SRI debate the claimed benefits and many questions about it remain unresolved.[4]Wageningen University has also published an article discussing the challenges of evaluating SRI in which one concluding sentence read: “Although the technical aspects of SRI have been contested, it clearly exists as a real social phenomenon”.[5]

The question at hand seems to be: is SRI better at delivering increased yield and other benefits to rice farmers, such as healthier soils, when compared with established recommended best management practices for rice production?

Cases of success

Proponents of SRI claim its use increases yield, saves water, reduces production costs, and increases income and that benefits have been achieved in 40 countries.[6] Uphoff published an article in the International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability that states that SRI “can raise irrigated rice yields to about double the present world average without relying on external inputs, also offering environmental and equity benefits”.[7]

A special issue on SRI in the non-SCI scientific journal Paddy and Water Environment collected recent findings in support of SRI.[8]

In 2011 a young farmer named Sumant Kumar set an unverified and uncontrolled new world record in rice production of 22.4 tons per hectare using SRI, beating the existing world record held by the Chinese scientist Yuan Longping by 3 tons.[3][9][10]

Criticism

The productivity of SRI is under debate between supporters and critics of the system. Critics of SRI suggest that claims of yield increase in SRI are due to unscientific evaluations. They object that there is a lack of details on the methodology used in trials and a lack of publications in the peer-reviewed literature.[11][12] Some critics have suggested that SRI success is unique to soil conditions in Madagascar.[13

مجید نیک نژاد

مجید نیک نژاد

Α motivatinbg discussion is definitely woｒth comment.
There’s no dooubt that tһhat you oսghnt to publish mmore on this subject, iit mayy not be a taboo subject but generally people don’t discuss such subjects.